Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 174

Thread: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

  1. #161
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,736

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    How so? Left wing organizations that use similar keywords would similarly be targeted. Just for the hell of it I ran the numbers. Here's the list I used, (Feel free to critique since it was a fairly superficial, though I think mostly fair analysis)

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/genera...post1061839433

    The control points seem to match up fairly well. There were aprox 8800 words in all of the organizations approved, and 392 words in the organizations with political leanings. Here are the results of every word that occurred 5 or more times in the political list. (And please, I did this fast so there may be mistakes, but no intentional ones)

    Word #Occ %Occ %Baseline
    Inc
    Party
    Tea
    for
    Patriots
    of
    Fund
    Coalition
    American
    the
    Ohio
    Action
    Freedom
    31
    24
    23
    17
    13
    11
    7
    7
    7
    6
    6
    6
    5
    7.91
    6.12
    5.87
    4.34
    3.32
    2.81
    1.79
    1.79
    1.79
    1.53
    1.53
    1.53
    1.28
    7.21
    0.53
    0.26
    1.11
    0.25
    5.47
    0.36
    0.32
    1.18
    0.90
    0.25
    0.34
    0.34

    And if we limit the number to say words that occur 5x more often in groups flagged for politics than the universe of groups at large we get:
    Tea: 22 Times more likely
    Patriots: 13 Times more likely
    Party: 12 Times more likely
    Ohio: 6 Times more likely
    Coalition: 6 Times more likely
    Fund: 5 Times more likely
    Action: 5 Times more likely.

    So here's my Bolo, "Tea, Patriots, Party, Ohio, Coalition, Fund, Action and Progress". Progress should also be one, but it wasn't pulled up by the algorithm because it's split up among Progress/Progressive/Progressnow.. etc..." But, that's me adding in my personal bias to the selection, also 912 occurred 4 times, but 4 is less than my arbitrary number of 5. (I would have had to add Country, and, a, and 912).

    Addendum: here's the list from the IRS. Some of these groups were filing as 501(c)(3)'s
    http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/Appr...209%202013.pdf
    One other group Im curious about, those whose applications were both not acted upon and not investigated but left in limbo.

  2. #162
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:44 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    One other group Im curious about, those whose applications were both not acted upon and not investigated but left in limbo.
    Agreed. Though I'm fairly sure that the IRS is prohibited from disclosing any information on any application until it's approved.

    The only group I know of on that list is Crossroads GPS. They claim to have applied, but they haven't yet been approved. I don't think that Priorities USA is in limbo, but only because they never applied.

  3. #163
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickieboy View Post
    In all your examples there was outrage and congress folks wrote the IG to investigate (similar to this case) which they did and found no 'egregious' IRS actions. However in this case the IG DID find 'egregious' actions which is the issue which the IRS, Congress AND the Whitehouse agrees with...
    Outrage by who? Have you seen anyone one in the Impeach Obama club say a damn thing about how those were wrong? And where did you get the information that no 'egregious' IRS actions were found on the Bush era ones?

    Still doesn't change my point that we have the Impeach Obama club getting angry over the IRS ensuring 501(c)4s aren't being used as PACs and saying nothing about the IRS being used for as an attack dog for nothing more than political spite.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #164
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    So many wrongheaded ideas.
    Too bad none of them are.

    1. What something is NAMED should not affect how its treated under the law.
    In a world of infinite resources where the IRS has huge staff to look at each application sure. That world does not exist. Again, the IRS did the same thing the Israelis do at their border. They profiled. What you simply do not understand is what the code actually says. Essentially you are arguing that the Israelis shouldn't profile shady Arab Males with "Death to Israel" on their shirts as they try to enter Israel. If you have an overtly political name, you SHOULD get scrutiny when you apply for a status that legally bars you from engaging in political activity as your primary activity.

    The worst part about this is several Tea Party groups outright LIED to the IRS in stating they would have no political activity. Some were running ads BEFORE they submitted their applications that stated they would engage in no political activity.

    2. The IRS is not allowed to crack down willy nilly. It has oversight, it has regulations to adhere to, excessive repeated examination of a person or organization is exactly the kind of misuse of government we are supposedly trying to avoid--yet you want more of it.
    Using profiling is not willy nilly. You are upset that a group you like got profiled. Fundementally that is your problem. And the IRS again does not have infinite resources. And it's flat out stupid to call what they did stupid. Overtly political groups applying for a status that legally bars them from being primarily political and you think it's wrong to give extra scrutiny to those with names overtly political? So many wrongheaded ideas you have. Go talk to Israel. Tell them that their profiling is wrong. *rolls eyes*

    3. Eliminating tax exempt status is a non starter, your opinion is noted and your distaste of the group as a whole is noted. IE your inherent bias.
    And how does that make me wrong? Oh wait. It doesn't. You are on the losing end of this discussion. I get that you do not have any clue about the abuse going on. I get that you do not have even the slightest grasp of what the code actually says. I get that you cannot even imagine the kind of arguments that tax professionals have been making. But you think you can come in here and pretend you know more than me. Really?

    [qupte]4. Trolling bull**** is trolling bull****. Not everyone that disagrees with you doesnt understand, they just dont agree. If you really want to hold out that environmental groups dont advocate into politics, you are definitely fooling yourself.[/quote]

    Show me a single person other than myself who has demonstrated knowledge of the code, the history of abuse and the expertise of the subject. You won't simply because you cannot.

    5. Coming out against a specific war rather than war itself. Gray area. One that Bush got a lot of heat over. Again BOOOOOOSHHHHHH. Cant help yourself, can you?
    That's the best you have? You are turning into a partian hackjob.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  5. #165
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Which ignores leaving left wing sounding groups alone while adding extra scrutiny to right wing sounding ones. Blaming the process does not remove culpability for those controlling it. We havent seen anyone acting to remove those bad decision makers and/or policy makers. I hear a lot of talk of inability to examine things objectively, Im not buying that as an excuse. If they dont have enough personnel for that how can they have enough personnel to examine all the nonsense they are asking for? They are literally asking for hundreds of pages of documents to sift through.
    What the frack is a left sounding name?

    3, 12 and maybe 4 and 8 are the ones that stand out. I find it funny how you think the IRS should abandon critical thinking.

    Perhaps if you understood the subject, you wouldn't be making stupid statements?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #166
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    How so? Left wing organizations that use similar keywords would similarly be targeted
    His problem is primarily that groups he favors got targeted. He's so offended that he's actually arguing that the IRS shouldn't practice critical thinking.

    It's pretty asinine to think that the IRS should basically go about it like this:

    "Well, the law explicitly states that such an organization either cannot do political activity in a material way, or as a primary function, so let's completely ignore the signs that scream that this application is heavily political."

    But that is exactly what OpportunityCost is arguing for.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  7. #167
    Guru
    Porchev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    GA
    Last Seen
    01-08-17 @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    3,092

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    This abuse of power by friends of Obama in the IRS is very disturbing. Is this next?:

    IRS.jpg

  8. #168
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    you SHOULD get scrutiny
    USAToday: IRS gave liberals a pass; Tea Party groups put on hold

    In the 27 months that the Internal Revenue Service put a hold on all Tea Party applications for non-profit status, it approved applications from similar liberal groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

    As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," these groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.
    and then

    you are arguing that the Israelis shouldn't profile shady Arab Males
    comparing hamas to rand paul?

    THE TWILIGHT ZONE THEME - YouTube

  9. #169
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:44 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    His problem is primarily that groups he favors got targeted. He's so offended that he's actually arguing that the IRS shouldn't practice critical thinking.

    It's pretty asinine to think that the IRS should basically go about it like this:

    "Well, the law explicitly states that such an organization either cannot do political activity in a material way, or as a primary function, so let's completely ignore the signs that scream that this application is heavily political."

    But that is exactly what OpportunityCost is arguing for.
    I totally agree. That said OppportunityCost is conservative, but he's not a frother. You'd probably get better milage with a softer tone.

  10. #170
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: IRS officials in Washington were involved in targeting of conservative groups

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Outrage by who?
    'Righties' were screaming for the IRS to investigate for what they believed was political comments.
    'Lefties' were screaming that they weren't but merely voicing opposition (legitimately I believe) of the war.

    [/QUOTE]Have you seen anyone one in the Impeach Obama club say a damn thing about how those were wrong? [/QUOTE]

    No, have you? That was then, this is now.

    And where did you get the information that no 'egregious' IRS actions were found on the Bush era ones?
    Here:
    U.S. Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)
    I don't have time right now to search it again but it was in Sept '05...IIRC.


    Still doesn't change my point that we have the Impeach Obama club getting angry over the IRS ensuring 501(c)4s aren't being used as PACs and saying nothing about the IRS being used for as an attack dog for nothing more than political spite.
    This is true. The 'Impeach Obama club' is quite over the top...right now as there is just so much we don't know. And ultimately I sincerely doubt he was involved at a level to be impeached over. Now as far as 'an attack dog' this very well may be true and potentially sourced from many different places; Tres. employees union, campaign officials, etc. but again we just don't have enough information to substantiate this...yet
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 715161718 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •